Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘marijuana’

Masculinity Isn’t Toxic, Our Erasure of It Is


BY: TRISTAN JUSTICE | JANUARY 17, 2023

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2023/01/17/masculinity-isnt-toxic-our-erasure-of-it-is/

Sam Smith
Those who wrote off masculinity as ‘toxic’ never truly understood the concept.

Author Tristan Justice profile

TRISTAN JUSTICE

VISIT ON TWITTER@JUSTICETRISTAN

MORE ARTICLES

Sam Smith does not look healthy.

Last week, conservative journalist Andy Ngo published screenshots of the singer’s Instagram page. On the left, Smith is seen handsomely seated with his prestigious Oscar. The ensuing photos highlight his attempt to transition into someone who is “non-binary,” or a person who believes he was born a third sex or above the sexes altogether. The logic defies everything we know about human biology down to the binary nature of our chromosomes.

No one seems to know what a woman is these days, but does anyone even remember what a man is? Smith’s progression in Ngo’s photos underscores the erasure of cultural masculinity declared “toxic” by millennials. When you lose sight of what it means to be a man — what it means to look like a man, act like a man, and live like a man — you de facto lose the values that form the foundation of healthy masculinity. But our culture doesn’t even know what a man is.

Around this time last year, my Federalist colleague John Daniel Davidson provided a definition.

“If we’re going to defend manliness as good and virtuous and necessary for a healthy republic, then we need to be clear about what it is and what it is not,” he wrote, continuing:

Yes, men should be physically strong. They should also exemplify traditional masculine virtues like courage, independence, and assertiveness. But why? Not so they can sh-tpost about how ripped or good-looking they are compared to libs, but so they can protect and defend those who are weak.

That is the organizing principle behind the entire concept of manliness: it is not a style or a pose or an adornment. It is a way of being, of living according to the principle that you are responsible for the welfare of others, and should sacrifice yourself for their sake.

What does that mean in practice? It means stepping in to help those in need, whether it’s a woman being harassed or a stranger whose car has broken down. It means risking your own safety to protect someone being attacked, instead of just filming the attack on your phone and posting it online like a beta.

It also means marrying and remaining faithful to the same woman your entire life, and raising a family with her. It means working whatever hours and at whatever job in order to provide for that family. It means going to church every Sunday, whether you feel like it or not, to pass your faith on to your kids. It means getting up in the middle of the night to feed a colicky baby. It means taking your two-year-old daughter to swim class and singing all the songs — your own sense of dignity be damned.

I’m not sure I could write a better definition, amplifying the stoic virtues of physical strength, mental fortitude, and sacrificial living driven by a desire to strengthen the weak and protect the vulnerable.

Where we break is sexuality, and writing as a gay man, I know we don’t see eye to eye on certain fundamental differences. I may never live up to the picture of masculinity Davidson’s worldview prescribes, and I may never have children, but we can agree to disagree like adults. And that’s where the left has gone mad.

Gay men are often allergic to any kind of conversation surrounding masculinity because they’ve been mocked by a class of macho men as “queer,” a slur-turned-term-of-endearment that now qualifies one for the left’s privilege points. True masculinity, however, extends safety for the victims. Those who vilified it never truly understood the concept.

Before Davidson’s column, I’m not sure I remember even thinking critically about manhood — perhaps during a conversation with my father in high school. But beyond that, these discussions seem to have been choked out by a culture eager to dismiss masculinity as universally toxic.

If you question Smith’s regression — the legitimacy of it, the integrity of it, and even the consequences of it — you’re a heretic to the woketopian ruling class that’s hellbent on dictating acceptable speech.

But it isn’t just Smith. There’s a deeper mentally disturbed current pulsing beneath the decline of healthy masculinity and femininity. Consider that nearly 60 percent of people who call themselves “non-binary” report having a mental health issue. And that’s despite both difficulties in diagnosing mental illnesses and the fact that gender dysphoria itself is a mental sickness included in the latest psychiatric manual of mental disorders, meaning the real percentage is far higher.

See for yourself. How is this not a mental illness? Why are we not allowed to call it that? And why on Earth is it unacceptable to ask questions about the twisted state of the sexes?

These people are obviously struggling with a pain that’s very real. Their so-called gender identities might be made up, but their pain undeniably exists. Contrary to parental blackmail by family therapists, data shows gender-confused people are even more likely to commit suicide if they move forward with some kind of transgender transition.

The intolerance of questions surrounding gender dysphoria is baked into the elimination of masculine virtues, which promises peace and coexistence — or the allure of a projected $5 billion surgical industry by the end of the decade. But we need to understand what in the world is going on with men, and we need to be able to ask these questions.

Men today are not working. Their suicide rates are rising as high as their testosterone levels are falling low: While men make up nearly half the population, they represent 80 percent of suicides, and testosterone levels have dropped by double digits since the 1980s.

Men’s low testosterone levels reflect a population that’s not eating right, not exercising right, and not acting on their underlying ambitions. They’re becoming apathetic pot smokers stuck in the pursuit of cheap dopamine hits through Netflix and porn. And these low “T” levels are threatening fertility, which is already on the decline, in the long term, while guaranteeing a generation of fat, lazy men with no hormonal motivation in the short term.

The death of masculinity — its public execution brought about by its supposed toxicity — is the existential crisis nobody’s talking about.

Note: this is the first post in the author’s new conservative newsletter on culture, health, and wellness. If you liked this post and the topics addressed, consider subscribing here.


Tristan Justice is the western correspondent for The Federalist. He has also written for The Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal. His work has also been featured in Real Clear Politics and Fox News. Tristan graduated from George Washington University where he majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at Tristan@thefederalist.com.

Ann Coulter Letter; “Contest: What Will The GOP Cave On Next?”


waving flagAnn Coulter  | 

URL of the Original Posting Site: http://humanevents.com/2015/05/13/contest-what-will-the-gop-cave-on-next/?utm_source=coulterdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

Contest: What Will The GOP Cave On Next?

 Bloomberg News ran a happy news story this week about the “surprising” development of Republicans joining Democrats in their effort to end our “incarceration generation” by the simple expedient of putting fewer criminals in prison. (Lots of good ideas involve ham-fisted, Johnnie Cochran-style rhymes.)

And Bloomberg wasn’t just talking about the media’s usual lickspittle, Sen. Rand Paul.

Former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and former Texas governor Rick Perry have all called for “new” approaches to allegedly “non-violent” drug crimes — i.e., any approach other than prison.

Perry says: “You want to talk about real conservative governance? Shut prisons down. Save that money.”

Sen. Ted Cruz — along with lickspittle Paul — wants to end mandatory minimum sentencing. Yes, remember how much we trust judges to use their discretion wisely? The precise reason the public demanded mandatory minimums was because so many liberal judges had their own ideas about “alternatives to prison” — such as, again, not prison.

Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee suggests that, instead of prison, the government should “address character.”

Huckabee, for example, addressed the character of Maurice Clemmons — a career violent criminal who said he was deeply remorseful and was trying to be a good Christian — by granting him clemency. This allowed Maurice to rape a child and slaughter four police officers execution-style, in “the largest number of law enforcement officers killed by one man in a single incident in U.S. history,” at least according to Wikipedia.

(On the bright side, releasing Maurice saved Arkansas taxpayers all sorts of money — just as Perry predicted!)

Before sucking up to The New York Times, it would be really great if Republicans would read, so they’d know stuff.

Contrary to the assholery being pushed nonstop by the left, for example:

(1) No one is in prison just for possessing a joint; and

(2) So-called “non-violent” drug crimes that result in prison are generally committed by violent criminals.

Evidently, Americans need to patiently explain to elected Republicans — who are too busy hanging out with their Chamber of Commerce friends to have any idea how the world works — that no judge is going to waste prison space on a guy selling a joint.

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, only 0.7 percent of all state inmates are behind bars for marijuana possession alone. Carnegie Mellon’s Jonathan Caulkins puts the figure at less than half a percent.

And these are the convictions of record.

Our pro-criminal media invariably cite the conviction of record, as if that’s the worst crime committed by the defendant. But, as the Times itself reports: “97 percent of federal cases and 94 percent of state cases end in plea bargains.”

Do you think criminals are pleading guilty to the most serous offenses they’re actually guilty of?

Defense attorney: The prosecutors want to charge you with murder one, menacing, drug possession and distribution.

Criminal: OK, I’ll plead to murder one.

Defense attorney: No! We’ll offer to plead to possession of marijuana.

Criminal: Oh! OK, OK, I see — yes, you’re right

Show me all the wonderful fellows in prison just because they had a single joint. I want three examples — and I want their names, so I can find out what they really did.

For years — in fact, to this very day — the left’s poster boy for the monstrous injustice of the war on drugs was DeMarcus Sanders, whose life was ruined, so the legend goes, just because police found a single marijuana seed in his car.

And then you run a basic Google search and find out that DeMarcus was a known gang member who had already served time for shooting a rival gang member. After that conviction, DeMarcus was arrested — again, for who knows what — but copped a plea to possession of marijuana, the only charge we ever hear about in connection with his name.

Just a few months ago, DeMarcus was again sentenced to prison, this time after taking a plea to being “a prohibited person in possession of a firearm and ammunition,” as the Waterloo-Cedar Falls Courier (Iowa) reports. (Incidentally, I thought we all agreed that known felons shouldn’t be allowed to have guns.)

The reason so many plea bargains involve firearms and drugs isn’t that those are the perp’s main crime: It’s because guns and drugs aren’t human beings who can make lousy witnesses, leave the jurisdiction, die or be intimidated out of testifying. Possession offenses are the very least the prosecutor can demand in a plea bargain and the quickest way to get bad guys off the street.

Prosecutors know who the defendants are, and know what they really did. That’s why those in prison for “mere” drug possession actually have a higher arrest rate for violent crimes than those in prison for burglary, robbery or even drug trafficking, according to innumerable studies, including one in the Journal of the American Statistical Association.

You know what would be really great? Instead of Republicans impressing the media by taking “surprising” positions on crime, how about Republicans try surprising us by taking a position against Wall Street or the Chamber of Commerce and on the side of ordinary Americans?

True, it wouldn’t be celebrated as a “kumbaya” moment by Bloomberg News. But on the plus side, a lot fewer Americans would be murdered, crippled, raped and robbed.

OARLogo Picture6

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: